4.7 Article

Poly(Ethylene Oxide)-based Electrolyte for Solid-State-Lithium-Batteries with High Voltage Positive Electrodes: Evaluating the Role of Electrolyte Oxidation in Rapid Cell Failure

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 10, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-61373-9

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. German Federal Ministry for Education and Research within the project FestBatt [13XP0175A]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Polyethylene oxide (PEO)-based solid polymer electrolytes (SPEs) typically reveal a sudden failure in Li metal cells particularly with high energy density/voltage positive electrodes, e.g. LiNi0.6Mn0.2Co0.2O2 (NMC622), which is visible in an arbitrary, time - and voltage independent, voltage noise during charge. A relation with SPE oxidation was evaluated, for validity reasons on different active materials in potentiodynamic and galvanostatic experiments. The results indicate an exponential current increase and a potential plateau at 4.6 V vs. Li vertical bar Li+, respectively, demonstrating that the main oxidation onset of the SPE is above the used working potential of NMC622 being < 4.3V vs. Li vertical bar Li+. Obviously, the SPE vertical bar NMC622 interface is unlikely to be the primary source of the observed sudden failure indicated by the voltage noise. Instead, our experiments indicate that the Li vertical bar SPE interface, and in particular, Li dendrite formation and penetration through the SPE membrane is the main source. This could be simply proven by increasing the SPE membrane thickness or by exchanging the Li metal negative electrode by graphite, which both revealed voltage noise-free operation. The effect of membrane thickness is also valid with LiFePO4 electrodes. In summary, it is the cell set-up (PEO thickness, negative electrode), which is crucial for the voltage-noise associated failure, and counterintuitively not a high potential of the positive electrode.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available